The pan-purple alliance formed by social activist groups have pointed out that the DPP and the KMT are of the same ilk and give no thought to fairness and justice or to helping disadvantaged groups. This undoubtedly is a serious blow to the DPP, whose momentum has been ebbing since the pan-blue camp's Lien-Soong ticket became a reality.
If the DPP continues to adopt the election strategy of "policy vote-buying" and the traditional methods of bringing local factions into its fold, and yet is unable to propose persuasive, implementable concepts to boost the morale of its supporters, then the party's defeat in Hualien could repeat itself in Taipei.
According to a public opinion survey conducted early last month, 40 percent of the public are satisfied with President Chen Shui-bian's (
Questioning the public about the various factors affecting Chen's performance, we find that 77 percent believe the sluggish global economy has had a big impact on Chen's government. Seventy-three percent believe Chen's government does not have enough people with a talent for governance. Sixty-five percent believe the administration does not have the ability to carry out policies. Sixty-four percent believe the opposition parties have obstructed the administration's work.
As for the question of whether TV and the newspapers have been friendly to the Chen government, 39 percent believe the media has been unfriendly. This figure is three percentage points higher than those who believe the media has been friendly.
The results show that the public has been quite fair. On the one hand, they have pointed out that the government does not have enough talented people or the ability to carry out policies. On the other hand, they also believe that the government has been affected by the global economic downturn and the opposition's obstructionism.
Even 62 percent of KMT and PFP supporters believe the opposition has obstructed the DPP government's work.
That said, people are still dissatisfied with Chen's government. For example, a third of the people who believe the opposition's obstructionism has had a great impact on government are also dissatisfied with the government. Fifty-one percent of those who believe the global economy has had a great impact are also dissatisfied with the government's performance.
In other words, even though the public "understands" that the administration's performance has been affected by the global economy and opposition obstructionism, they are still dissatisfied or disappointed with the DPP government's performance.
Not having enough talented people and the ability to carry out policies can be viewed as the DPP's internal factors, while the global economy and opposition obstructionism can be viewed as external factors. According to the analysis, the internal factors have a far greater effect on the satisfaction rates than the external factors do.
In other words, the belief that the global economy or opposition obstructionism has had an affect does have an impact on the satisfaction rate, but the impact is not so big.
In contrast, the belief that the DPP government is short on talented people and ability has a huge effect on the administration's reputation. As I have mentioned above, a majority of the public do not have enough confidence in the administration's talents and ability. Only 14 percent believe the administration has enough talented people while 73 percent believe it does not. Only a quarter of the public believe it has the ability to carry out policies while more than two thirds believe it does not.
The ability to carry out policies has the biggest impact on the administration's reputation. Improving this ability should be the key priority to attempt to reverse the public's perception of the authorities. The social activist groups are mostly disappointed with the fact that the DPP government has lost its ideals and considers everything from an election perspective.
It is very likely that the DPP will be unable to guard its 40 percent basic support if its leaders merely make election promises, cut ribbons, give away "divine pigs" and conduct an ineffectual review of the election defeat in Hualien, in the same way as the KMT reviewed its election losses in the past.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a professor of sociology at National Taiwan University and a member of the Taipei Society.
Translated by Francis Huang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath